PSI 155 General Investigations PDF

1 WELCOME PSI 155 General Investigations Who am I? What to expect? What do you need? Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved. ...

1 WELCOME PSI 155 General Investigations Who am I? What to expect? What do you need? Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  2 Det. Mike Norman, Toronto Police “Mike” He/Him Il/lui Dipl. Police foundations – 1996 Hired TPS 1999 Bach. Justice Studies – 2004 Dad 2013 Promoted TPS 2013 Bach. Psychology – 2014 Dad again 2016 Mast. Criminal Justice – 2024 Humber College Instructor 2024  3 Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  4 Example Mike Norman is walking down Lakeshore Blvd on the South Side near Kipling Ave. A man crosses the street Southbound on the West Side of Kipling and approaches Norman. The man grabs Norman’s bag with one hand and uses a knife to cut the shoulder strap. Norman resists and ends up falling to the ground, cutting his hand on the road salt. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  5 Example Uniform police attend and are told by a witness that the man was wearing a Humber Athletics hoodie, grey sweatpants and no hat. 5’9” 150 lbs, White, brown hair. Face tattoo on right cheek. You are the Detective. What evidence do you want and how will you collect it? Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  7 CHAPTER 1 The Role of Evidence in the Prosecution of Criminal Offences Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  8 Learning Outcomes After completing this chapter, you should be able to: Understand what evidence is and the different forms it takes. Discuss the general rules that determine what types of evidence are admissible. Explain the difference between the concepts of relevance and materiality. Describe some of the reasons that evidence is excluded from a criminal trial. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  9 Learning Outcomes (cont’d) Define the concept of privilege and why privileged information is not admissible. Distinguish between the concepts of admissibility and weight. Discuss the essential elements of a criminal offence. Understand different types of legal defences to a criminal charge. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  10 Evidence Defined Evidence  Legal use: information or physical material relied on in legal proceedings as proof of facts in issue  Forensic use: things left behind at a crime scene, or the memories of a witness to the crime, that help investigators understand what happened  “Facts” are decided by the court—judge or jury  “Golden Thread”: person is innocent until proven guilty Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  11 Different Forms of Evidence Statement Evidence: sworn testimony, given by a witness in court or in a pre-trial procedure Real Evidence: evidence that the court can use its own senses to make observations of and draw conclusions about, including tangible things (e.g., a seized weapon) or intangible things (e.g., observing the demeanour of a witness during testimony) Documentary Evidence: “any record of a permanent or semi-permanent nature and any information recorded or stored by means of any device” (Lederman, et al., 2014, p. 1241) Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  12 The Law of Evidence The rules that determine whether or not something will be admitted as evidence that the court may consider in determining whether an accused person is guilty or not guilty of a criminal offence. Sources of the rules in criminal prosecutions: 1) Canada Evidence Act 2) Common law (also known as case law or precedent) 3) Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  13 The Law of Evidence (cont’d) Aims of the rules: 1) Avoid the wrongful conviction of innocent people 2) Ensure the trier of fact is provided with the most reliable evidence available 3) Protect the interests of witnesses and complainants Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  14 Admitting Evidence Evidence that is relevant and material is admissible unless: an exclusionary rule makes the evidence inadmissible the probative value of the evidence is outweighed by its prejudicial effect Relevance: the logical relationship that makes a proposition more or less probable; relevance is the most important factor in determining admissibility Materiality: the degree to which a piece of evidence is necessary to prove a proposition Not all evidence that is relevant will also be material. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  15 Admitting Evidence (cont’d) Probative value: evidence that logically helps prove a fact or issue What is the evidence trying to prove? How reliable is the evidence? Prejudicial effect: undesirable side effects of a piece of evidence that may be deemed unfair to the accused For each piece of evidence, does the probative value outweigh the prejudicial effect? Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  16 Potential Prejudicial Effect p. 10 Evidence would cause undue emotional reaction to the trier of fact. Accused in Impaired trial is a drug dealer Evidence would create a side issue that would unduly distract from the main issue. Has committed robberies in the past Evidence would create a delay or be time consuming. Misuse of Expert Evidence would create unfair surprise to opponent. Surprise evidence Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  17 Excluding Evidence p. 11 Reasons for excluding evidence include: 1) Irrelevance 2) Unreliability 3) Prejudice 4) Unfairness 5) Procedural unfairness Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  18 Excluding Evidence (cont’d) Major rules of exclusion: 1) Hearsay p. 12 - (Unreliability) 2) Character evidence p. 17 - (Irrelevance) 3) Opinion evidence p. 21 (Prejudice) 4) Improperly obtained evidence p. 23 (Fairness) 5) Privilege p. 25 (Procedural unfairness) Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  19 Major Rules of Exclusion—Hearsay (p.12) Evidence that is indirect because it is given by a witness who has heard it from another source. Generally speaking, hearsay evidence is inadmissible, with the following exceptions: 1) Spontaneous statements 2) Statements made by the accused (admissions) 3) Testimony given on a previous occasion 4) Prior inconsistent statements 5) Dying declarations 6) Historical facts and materials relied on by experts 7) Business records and declarations in the course of duty Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  20 Major Rules of Exclusion—Character Evidence p. Evidence that is presented to establish personality, attitude, general capacity, or the propensity to behave in a certain way. As a general rule: the accused is allowed to enter evidence of good character the Crown is not allowed to enter evidence of bad character Exceptions to rule excluding bad-character evidence: accused asserts good character; character is directly in issue; similar-fact evidence. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  21 Major Rules of Exclusion—Opinion Evidence Evidence of what a witness thinks or believes, generally held to be inadmissible. Exceptions to the inadmissibility of opinion evidence: 1) Lay witnesses may express their opinion where the conclusion they reach is one that people of ordinary experience may reach (e.g., recognizing familiar handwriting) 2) Expert witnesses may testify where their expert opinion is relevant, necessary to assist the trier of fact, and where they are properly qualified as long as their evidence does not violate an exclusionary rule Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  22 Major Rules of Exclusion—Improperly Obtained Evidence Evidence obtained by improper legal procedures (e.g., entering a dwelling without a warrant; failing to inform a suspect of their rights). The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms underpins all other principles in the Canadian criminal justice system and enshrines rights related to fair and judicious investigation and prosecution. Charter violations may cause evidence to be excluded. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  23 Major Rules of Exclusion—Improperly Obtained Evidence Sec. 7 – Right to life Liberty and security of person Sec. 8 – Right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure Sec. 9 - The right not to be aribitrarily detained or imprisoned. Sec. 10 – The right on arrest or detention to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor, to retain and instruct a lawyer without delay, and to be informed of that right. Sec. 11 – procedural fairness Sec. 12 – No cruel/unusual treatment Sec. 13 – Right against self-incrimination Sec. 14 – The right to an interpreter in proceedings. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  24 Major Rules of Exclusion—Privilege Exemption from admissibility that attaches to evidence produced in special circumstances. Certain relationships have gained class privilege protection from the courts, including: solicitor–client privilege spousal privilege informer privilege Crown or public-interest privilege On a case-by-case basis, communication for which privilege is claimed must satisfy the four criteria of the Wigmore test. Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  25 Admissibility versus Weight Not all evidence is created equal. Evidence that is admissible will be given different weight. Three factors tend to give evidence greater weight: Corroborative evidence—independently sourced evidence that supports another piece of evidence Clean evidence—evidence that is collected and preserved according to proper legal procedures and protocols Continuity—accounting for the integrity of the evidence by demonstrating knowledge of everyone who has handled it and its whereabouts from the time it was collected until it is entered as an exhibit Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  26 Burden of Proof  Person or party responsible for proving fact, issue, case  “Onus” of proof  Side making allegation (claim, accusation) must prove it  Other side has right to answer accusation in open court before a fair, impartial judge or judge and jury Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  27 Raising a Defence  An accused has the right not to present any evidence in his or her defence  He or she may defend the charge by calling witnesses or asking questions to raise a reasonable doubt about the prosecution’s version of events  Less often, the accused will have to prove the defence  Sections of the Criminal Code contain reverse onus clauses that shift the burden from the prosecution to the defence to disprove a presumption (e.g., possession of counterfeit money) Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  28 Proving the Offence An accused can be convicted only if the prosecution can successfully prove two things beyond a reasonable doubt: 1) The individual committed the prohibited act (actus reus) 2) The individual intended to commit the act (mens rea) There are two recognized standards of proof: 3) Proof on a balance of probabilities 4) Proof beyond a reasonable doubt Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.  29 Standard of Proof Balance of Probabilities Proof that leaves the trier of fact convinced that the fact at issue is more likely true than not (sometimes called the civil standard of proof) In a civil (non-criminal) case, the required standard of proof Proof beyond a Reasonable Doubt Proof that is convincing enough for a reasonable person to be certain that the accused is guilty The required standard of proof for criminal cases Copyright © 2019 Emond Montgomery Publications. All rights reserved.